mmasashi

RSpec::Matchers.define :terminate do |code|
  actual = nil

  def supports_block_expectations?
    true
  end

  match do |block|
    begin
      block.call

renatolfc

client
dev tun
remote example.com
resolv-retry infinite
nobind
persist-key
persist-tun
ca [inline]
cert [inline]
key [inline]

526avijitgupta

emacs --daemon to run in the background. emacsclient.emacs24 <filename/dirname> to open in terminal

NOTE: "M-m and SPC can be used interchangeably".

• Undo - C-/
• Redo - C-?
• Change case: 1. Camel Case : M-c 2. Upper Case : M-u

3. Lower Case : M-l

omnibs

Comparative Benchmark Numbers @ Rackspace

I've taken the benchmarks from Matthew Rothenberg's phoenix-showdown, updated Phoenix to 0.13.1 and ran the tests on the most powerful machines available at Rackspace.

Results

Framework	Throughput (req/s)	Latency (ms)	Consistency (σ ms)

omnibs

Benchmarking Phoenix vs Rails vs Sinatra vs Express vs Martini...

I was curious about [Chris McCord's Phoenix vs Rails article][original] -- if you haven't read it, go do that now first. Go ahead, this will still be here when you get back. It won't make much sense unless you've read the original.

Like many other Elixir enthusiasts, I come from a Ruby background. That said, I found Rails to be a curious choice for comparison to Phoenix, since Rails is really a kitchen-sink framework meant to handle everything from database migrations to asset-pipeline compilation. Sinatra, on the other hand, is a more

twolfson

I'm learning about SOPS and setting it up as my preferred mechanism for storing secrets. Here are my notes.

PGP

It’s security mechanism is that we (i.e. client) use a PUBLIC key from the receiver (i.e. server) and encode it with a random key (I’m saying nonce but it could be reused)

This varies from RSA and SSH because the server uses a PUBLIC key to identify the client.

Web of trust

Web of trust operates by still using PGP (i.e. encoding with recipient’s public key) but additionally, we can encrypt/sign the data as our own by signing it with the client’s private key.

This means the recipient will initially decrypt via our (i.e. client’s) public key (verifying the source) and then decrypting via their (i.e. server’s) private key to get the data.

adham90

SPC s c remove highlight

**** Files manipulations key bindings
Files manipulation commands (start with ~f~):

| Key Binding | Description                                                    |
|-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------|
| ~SPC f c~   | copy current file to a different location                      |
| ~SPC f C d~ | convert file from unix to dos encoding                         |
| ~SPC f C u~ | convert file from dos to unix encoding                         |

QuantumGhost

@startuml
' uncomment the line below if you're using computer with a retina display
' skinparam dpi 300
!define Table(name,desc) class name as "desc" << (T,#FFAAAA) >>
' we use bold for primary key
' green color for unique
' and underscore for not_null
!define primary_key(x) <b>x</b>
!define unique(x) <color:green>x</color>
!define not_null(x) <u>x</u>

binarytemple

#!/bin/bash 

SOURCE=/tmp/int.erl
COMPILED=/tmp/int.beam

test -e $SOURCE || curl https://raw.githubusercontent.com/josevalim/otp/c7e82c6b406b632a191c791a1bd2162bde08f692/lib/debugger/src/int.erl > $SOURCE
erlc -o ${COMPILED%int.beam} $SOURCE
chmod 444 $COMPILED
chgrp admin $COMPILED

ahmadshah

Soft Delete Ecto Repo

The goal is to support soft delete functionality in Ecto.Repo. With the suggestion by @imranismail, another repo is created and the remaining functionalities are delegate to the original MyApp.Repo.

The new repo get/2 and all/1 functions will exclude the soft deleted record by default. delete/1 and delete_all/1 will update the delete_at column by default instead of deleting.

Example

MyApp.Repo.get(MyApp.User, 1) //will return nil if record is in soft delete state